Limitations for Tournament Organizers who are beginners in tournament organizing

Description:Most of the tournament organizers who are beginners in tournament organizing can underestimate the amount of work that needs to be done during the organizing of tournament and with that the quality of the tournament will drop due to mistakes or insufficient data etc. So I'm proposing some limitations in the amount of games that will be played in the tournament and the amount of players that can participate. Limitations will only apply for first and second tournament.

Specifics/Details:

limit the number of games in one tournament to 64*

limit the number of teams(players for non team tournament) to 16*

*proposed numbers are example, they can be changed

How this will benefit the site and/or other comments:

simplifying the process of tournament organizing

chances for underestimating of the amount of work needed to organize a tournament will be reduced

tournament organizers will have more time to provide accurate data of what is going on in the current round

I think that in some cases this would be a very good idea, but some TOs are capable of much more for a first time tournament. For instance, for my first tournament, I ran a sports league that had 32 players and ~275 games.

There is an automatic PM that is sent out when a TO gets privileges that explains a lot. And tells to ask for help if they need it. I know I have helped quite a few new TOs with everything.

I like the spirit of the suggestion, but I think that there isn't a large issue where this is problem. However, I do think that some kind of mentoring program would be good for first time TOs. This was done as a trial by the TO Usergroup in the past and has been discussed again. Perhaps something like that again would be a good thing for new TOs to utilize.

Hardly where in RL we can find beginners participating in professional events... For example there is no case where beginner is driving formula 1(give an average driver chance to drive and observe what will happen) or playing in professional football league(mostlikely his team will lose or the player will get a hart attack)...

Currently i participate in 2 tournaments organized by beginners in tournament organizing and I can say that the organization is bellow disastrous. Reason is simple, the tournament are too complicated.

This are the reasons I'm proposing this change. Alternative to not implementing RL rules is drop in CC players(look at the scoreboard, we will get bellow 15K any moment).

GoranZ wrote:Currently i participate in 2 tournaments organized by beginners in tournament organizing and I can say that the organization is bellow disastrous. Reason is simple, the tournament are too complicated.

this is a learning experience for you too.

do not join complicated tournaments UNLESS you are familiar with the TO.

Night Strike wrote:Tournaments, and specifically new organizers, are not why the number of players on the scoreboard is going down.

Nope nobody said that new organizers are the reason, they can never be a reason... However current rules are.

Example why I proposed this change is this tournament: viewtopic.php?f=91&t=157760From ~6 months since the tournament started, the TO hasn't posted in 4 times with intervals bigger then 1 month... its tournament from new TO.

Night Strike wrote:Tournaments, and specifically new organizers, are not why the number of players on the scoreboard is going down.

Nope nobody said that new organizers are the reason, they can never be a reason... However current rules are.

Example why I proposed this change is this tournament: viewtopic.php?f=91&t=157760From ~6 months since the tournament started, the TO hasn't posted in 4 times with intervals bigger then 1 month... its tournament from new TO.

There are a lot of experienced organizers that don't post in their tournament threads either. It probably just means that the two directors who handle abandoned tournaments should be tighter on their warnings to slacking organizers rather than have us institute new policies that needlessly restrict new organizers.

I agree generally with what I think is the majority here: Join tournaments at your own risk. Don't limit the organizers. I've seen tournaments waiting for players, where the TO says "Why isn't anyone joining?" and the response is "Because this is your first tournament and it's long/complicated." I think the players do a good job of policing themselves, TO's do a good job of knowing their limits. And if not, what's the big deal? It's annoying for a tournament not to finish, but it doesn't really matter.

I've entered 72 (or so) tournaments and I've only had 1 not finish. This doesn't seem to be a big problem.

agentcom wrote:I agree generally with what I think is the majority here: Join tournaments at your own risk. Don't limit the organizers. I've seen tournaments waiting for players, where the TO says "Why isn't anyone joining?" and the response is "Because this is your first tournament and it's long/complicated." I think the players do a good job of policing themselves, TO's do a good job of knowing their limits. And if not, what's the big deal? It's annoying for a tournament not to finish, but it doesn't really matter.

I've entered 72 (or so) tournaments and I've only had 1 not finish. This doesn't seem to be a big problem.

Night Strike wrote:There are a lot of experienced organizers that don't post in their tournament threads either. It probably just means that the two directors who handle abandoned tournaments should be tighter on their warnings to slacking organizers rather than have us institute new policies that needlessly restrict new organizers.

Example 1: viewtopic.php?f=91&t=157760From ~6 months since the tournament started, the TO hasn't posted in 4 times with intervals bigger then 1 month... its tournament from new TO.

Example 2: viewtopic.php?t=175961The Tournament has just started and the tournament organizer already hasn't posted for more then 1 month.

I'm wondering who is giving permission to these new TO's without pointing them the rules for organizing a tournament? Its obviously that restrictions are required, regardless if someone want or not, or stop giving permissions and medals to TO's that brake the rules.

Night Strike wrote:There are a lot of experienced organizers that don't post in their tournament threads either. It probably just means that the two directors who handle abandoned tournaments should be tighter on their warnings to slacking organizers rather than have us institute new policies that needlessly restrict new organizers.

Example 1: viewtopic.php?f=91&t=157760From ~6 months since the tournament started, the TO hasn't posted in 4 times with intervals bigger then 1 month... its tournament from new TO.

Example 2: viewtopic.php?t=175961The Tournament has just started and the tournament organizer already hasn't posted for more then 1 month.

I'm wondering who is giving permission to these new TO's without pointing them the rules for organizing a tournament? Its obviously that restrictions are required, regardless if someone want or not, or stop giving permissions and medals to TO's that brake the rules.

There are plenty of experienced organizers that don't do those things either, fyi.